Board of Ed. Election
It has been remarkably quiet, especially given the discontent over the District Administrative changes earlier this year.
I am not on Facebook, so I don't know if I am missing a more vigorous debate over there.
I think there are about 9 candidates running at this point.
However, I've seen very little PR from any of them.
There are 8 candidates now (this Village Green article lists the original 11 and notes which have dropped out.
The remaining ones as of today:
- Annemarie Maini (incumbent)
- Narda Chisholm-Greene
- Michael Laskowski
- Bruno J. Navarro
- Christopher Trzaska
- Shannon Cuttle
- Javier A. Farfan
- Marian Cutler
Some are running on the same signs. I've seen Maini with Farfan, and Trzaska and Cutler are a joint campaign as well. Shannon Cuttle is running with a solo sign. I don't know if there are any other joint campaigns.
Takes money to get the word out --- and with so many candidates, it can't be easy to raise enough for lawn signs, mailings, flyers, etc.
Guess we will be bombarded the week leading up to election day.
The Village Green posted the first BOE debate, which occurred on Oct 3rd:
If you have particular interests, their are time markers in the Village Green article about when they discussed what topics.
nohero said:
There are 8 candidates now (this Village Green article lists the original 11 and notes which have dropped out.
The remaining ones as of today:
Some are running on the same signs. I've seen Maini with Farfan, and Trzaska and Cutler are a joint campaign as well. Shannon Cuttle is running with a solo sign. I don't know if there are any other joint campaigns.
- Annemarie Maini (incumbent)
- Narda Chisholm-Greene
- Michael Laskowski
- Bruno J. Navarro
- Christopher Trzaska
- Shannon Cuttle
- Javier A. Farfan
- Marian Cutler
Village Green has statement by Laskowski and he says he is running with Chisholm-Greene
Maini and Farfan are the Steve Latz-affiliated candidates. Their group currently holds a majority of BOE seats.
Stoughton said:
Maini and Farfan are the Steve Latz-affiliated candidates. Their group currently holds a majority of BOE seats.
Who is Steve Latz?
GoSlugs said:Stoughton said:Who is Steve Latz?
Maini and Farfan are the Steve Latz-affiliated candidates. Their group currently holds a majority of BOE seats.
He's a former Board of Ed member who has managed numerous campaigns for candidates since leaving the BOE.
Like anyone involved in electoral politics, there are people who agree and disagree with him and the policies and principles that candidates affiliated with him support.
However, it might be helpful for people to understand that the Maini/Farfan ticket represents maintaining the same leadership and direction as the current board.
Steve Latz is the name that always gets pulled out at BOE election time without any explanation. I guess he was a controversial character for some but we never know why.
The issue I care about the most about is the middle school configuration and whether or not we set up sequential 5-6, 7-8 middle schools or maintain two parallel middle schools that would be 6-8 or 5-8.
At the SOMA Cares Debate that was held at the Maplewood Library, Cutler, Narda Chisholm-Greene, Michael Laskowski, Christopher Trzaska, Javier Farfan, Marian Cutler said they were against having sequential middle schools.
Bruno J. Navarro said he was for it.
See 43:50 of the debate video.
Shannon Cuttle and Annemarie Maini were not at the debate. When Maini was asked on the SOMA Cares Facebook page what she thought of the middle school configuration she was not candid, and instead talked a lot about listening to the community. I could not tell what her position was. If anyone knows where Maini stands on the middle school configuration I'd like to know.
annielou said:
Steve Latz is the name that always gets pulled out at BOE election time without any explanation. I guess he was a controversial character for some but we never know why.
People can agree or disagree with the views that he and his candidates espouse, though I don't know that there's anything necessarily controversial about him. His candidates have had a lot of success winning seats on the BOE, but there's nothing wrong with effective political organization.
Runner_Guy said:
The issue I care about the most about is the middle school configuration and whether or not we set up sequential 5-6, 7-8 middle schools or maintain two parallel middle schools that would be 6-8 or 5-8.
Shannon Cuttle and Annemarie Maini were not at the debate. When Maini was asked on the SOMA Cares Facebook page what she thought of the middle school configuration she was not candid, and instead talked a lot about listening to the community. I could not tell what her position was. If anyone knows where Maini stands on the middle school configuration I'd like to know.
I don't think the issue would have gotten this far if Ms. Maini and other members of the voting majority weren't at least intrigued by the proposal as a way to deal with the district's overcrowding problem and to have schools that reflect the district's overall population (though this seems like a much bigger issue in the elementary schools).
Runner_Guy said:
The issue I care about the most about is the middle school configuration and whether or not we set up sequential 5-6, 7-8 middle schools or maintain two parallel middle schools that would be 6-8 or 5-8.
Why? What do you see as the pros/cons?
sprout said:
Runner_Guy said:Why? What do you see as the pros/cons?
The issue I care about the most about is the middle school configuration and whether or not we set up sequential 5-6, 7-8 middle schools or maintain two parallel middle schools that would be 6-8 or 5-8.
I see almost no upsides of having a split 5-6, 7-8 middle school and cannot believe that the proposal has gotten this far, since mainstream educational thought is now to give kids more continuity in their schooling and have smaller grades, hence the widespread elimination of junior high schools and the growing popularity of K-8s.
If the SOMSD sets up a 5-6, 7-8 configuration we will have grade sizes of 550, which would make our middle schools in the largest 1% in the nation. We would be putting kids in each middle school for only two years, which gives them little time to get to know guidance counselors, elective teachers, coaches, and the principal. The enormous size of the middle school grades will make them very impersonal for kids and easier to get lost in. Student behavior will probably be harder to manage too.
I suppose having an extra transition and large grades won't be bad for every single child, but the kids who are "fine" won't necessarily have an upside either, while the kids who aren't "fine" will have a downside.
Also, the split middle school proposal will require a large amount of bussing, which will cost about $800 per student, but possibly more if the SOMSD decides to set up late busses to accommodate students who participate in an extracurricular activity.
Since there are legal and political limits to how much the BOE can raise taxes by, the costs of that bussing will be paid for by discontinuing teacher lines.
The SOMSD will probably not bus kids who live within 2.0 miles of their respective school, which will make even more parents drive their kids. This will create stress on parents and noticeably worsen traffic in SOMA.
The elementary schools indeed have racial disproportionalities, but the two middle schools are already racially identical, to within 1 percentage point of each other.
annielou said:
Steve Latz is the name that always gets pulled out at BOE election time without any explanation. I guess he was a controversial character for some but we never know why.
He's the man behind the curtain and wields considerable power in the BOE. I've never understood it but it's true.
Elizabeth Baker needs to be replaced as BOE President. If you agree, then vote for those that are not backed by Latz. Maini was Treasurer for Baker & Baker the last time they ran. It's all very cozy on the BOE.
FYI... Elizabeth Baker has endorsed Maini and Farfan. It is up to you to decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing.
Coming up tomorrow evening:
"The League of Women Voters and Presidents’ Council BOE Candidates Forum: Wednesday, October 10, 7:30 p.m. at the BOE meeting room at 525 Academy Street, Maplewood, NJ."
Meet the Candidates events this week with "Advocates For All" Michael Laskowski and Narda Chisholm-Green. Tuesday, Oct. 16 6 to 7:30 pm Bunny's Sports Bar, South Orange. Saturday, Oct. 20, 10 am to noon, 22 Lexington Avenue.
Runner_Guy said:I see almost no upsides of having a split 5-6, 7-8 middle school and cannot believe that the proposal has gotten this far, since mainstream educational thought is now to give kids more continuity in their schooling and have smaller grades, hence the widespread elimination of junior high schools and the growing popularity of K-8s.
My go-to expert on educational issues who taught 5th and 6th grades for over 20 years has spoken favorably about 5-6, 7-8. I may explore that issue again.
I agree that a 5th grader and an 8th grader should not be in the same building unless there is very good team configuration. I do question why the younger, less problematic middle schoolers are designated for Maplewood MS and the older, more adolescent-like students are in South Orange MS. Just curious as to who made that decision and why.
annielou said:
I agree that a 5th grader and an 8th grader should not be in the same building unless there is very good team configuration.
What are some of your reasons? (Just curious as someone who attended a 5-8 middle school in the ’70s and whose child attended a K-8 school in Philadelphia through fourth grade.)
annielou said:
I agree that a 5th grader and an 8th grader should not be in the same building unless there is very good team configuration. I do question why the younger, less problematic middle schoolers are designated for Maplewood MS and the older, more adolescent-like students are in South Orange MS. Just curious as to who made that decision and why.
I thought that they were considering switching this after they were reminded that MMS had recently updated its science labs, and that they would better serve the older kids. I could be wrong.
The other significant argument in favor of the 5-6, 7-8 plan is the renovation savings. All of our buildings need repairs, but the swell of kids coming up forces a few issues. We have to increase security at the schools. Preventing a gunman from entering a school is pointless if there are classroom trailers out back. They have to go. By removing grade 5 from the schools they will have room for the additional swell of students, eliminating the need to add classrooms to elementary schools. The major work can be focused on the two middle schools. It's not perfect, but it seems well thought out to me.
And on a personal note, my child was thrilled to get to middle school to get some distance from the kids he had been with since kindergarten. After 6 years with essentially the same group of kids he was struggling with a few of them.
Developmentally, 5th graders are more like elementary students than they are like true adolescents, although I would agree that adolescence seems to be starting younger and younger. In the same way, 9th graders are more like adolescents than 12th graders, who are approaching adulthood. Many people have had great experiences in K through 8 schools because of the familiarity and,in some cases, having siblings in the same building for whom they may have after school responsibilities. When the middle school movement came along, a lot of those K through 8’s disappeared, in recognition of the unique characteristics and learning styles of adolescents. Very often districts must make decisions based on funding, however, and not on research.
I remain wholly unconvinced on the 5-6/7-8 proposal for a host of reasons, not least the added transitions, busing costs, questionable cost benefit, potential discipline increases, and regrets of those who have done so (mostly for cost reasons) and would not again if they had the chance for a do-over (Marian has written on her interviews with other districts quite a bit... I’ll see if I can post a link later). The costs of expanding the current setup were finally revealed last eve (better REALLY late than never, I suppose) and don’t provide for much to underscore the MS reconfiguration as an option IMO.
As to where candidates have been the past weeks— yes it’s been quiet. Speaking only for Marian and I, we’ve got a FB page and website, there are VG statements out for all candidates, and similar coming out for all in the NR as well.
https://www.trzaskacutler4boe.com/
In thinking about it, and considering the fact that we and some others are running campaigns alone without a manager, there’s enough to do in the earlier stages to keep us occupied, so the quiet is really just a result of things (questionnaires, surveys, debates, etc) happening elsewhere and personal lives taking up time as well.
I’m not doing mailers or robocalls... I despise them. Signs are coming in a week (neither of us thought it mandatory to pepper lawns a month out). Fundraiser/meet-and-greet at Bunny’s on 10/24 from 6-730 with a schedule for several informal meet-ups in town in Mwd and SO to be announced in a couple of days.
I’m reachable in person for any questions or for conversation, as many of you know. Just reach out in the interim.
redistricting nonsense aside, what’s the issue with the bonding proposal? how much do they want to borrow? and for what, now?
Do you have an hour?
My own issues are numerous. Notwithstanding those, the latest (there’s one issue right there) number is around $130m, but a moving target of some significant proportions.
If it weren't for lawn signs I wouldn't even know that there was an Election.
Who is running what do they or don't they stand for?